Suburb gangs (Minneapolis, St. Paul, Eden Prairie: apartment complexes, house, neighborhoods)

[moving123456]

Originally Posted by Camden Northsider

I agree with what you're saying golfgal, but it's misleading to imply that the only "issue" the suburbs have had lately is "one fight in chaska". There has been as much if not more "newsworthy" violence this year in suburban locales as there has been in Minneapolis- do a quick search on the strib's website and stories like this will come up:

4th charged in Lakeville shootings

Originally Posted by Star Tribune

Dakota County authorities on Monday charged a 20-year-old Minneapolis man in connection with the shootings of four people during a party at a Lakeville mobile home in late March. Nobody died.

So a Minneapolis resident brought his gun to a party in Lakeville?

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by moving123456

So a Minneapolis resident brought his gun to a party in Lakeville?

Again, misleading- a Minneapolis man was one of 5 involved in shootings at a trailer park in lakeville.

Originally Posted by Star Tribune

Three others have been jailed in Dakota and Hennepin counties. A fifth man, Osman O. Osman, 20, of Hopkins, is jailed in Nashville, Tenn., on unrelated charges and is charged.....
According to court papers, witnesses told police that a party had been going on when an acquaintance, Jibril Mohamed, and four other young men arrived. They paid a small cover charge but became upset because there weren't enough women there, court papers said. An argument ensued, and from outside the home, one man pulled a handgun from his waistband and fired at least seven shots into the mobile home, the papers say.

So, there is nothing in the article that says he was the shooter but rather a suspect thought to be involved in the shootings. And it's not like Minneapolis' homicide rates haven't been "upped" by suburbanites:

Trial opens for man accused of killing Minneapolis bicyclist with baseball bat

Actually, I would argue that suburbanites' impact on crime rates in Mpls are greater than the other way around. Suburban residents come to Mpls neighborhoods all the time to do "dirt". Of the 29 perps on this page, 13 are from non-Minneapolis addresses (1 St. Paul, the rest suburbs), 14 are from Minneapolis, and 2 are "unknown" addresses.

[Kebinminn]

Gangs made the move to small towns some time ago, it's not a surprise to me that activity is increasing in the suburbs either.

As far as the city/suburbs thing I don't get why people care. The burbs work better for some, the city for others. I live in Robbinsdale, I like it, our neighborhood is very nice with some nice people. I imagine if I moved further into the burbs I'd find some people I like there too, I have friends that live in Mpls/St Paul proper and also in Maple Grove and Shakopee. There's pros and cons to both. There's no victory in the suburbs developing a gang problem although there is a victory to the city because obviously they're making it a hostile area for them wherever they come from. It is my hope that the suburbs can replicate that accomplishment so eventually there's no place for them to go so that we call can enjoy our urban or suburban homes.

[Minnehahapolitan]

Originally Posted by gatorinmn

^^^^ You gotta be kidding me. Come talk to me when you feel more comfortable walking around downtown Minneapolis at 3:00 am than you do walking around in Shakopee or Chaska.

Downtown Minneapolis at 3a has more coppers than Tiananmen Square. I have said before and I will say now, downtown Mpls. is a safe place to be. I have never had problems there. The thing that makes me most uncomfortable is the plethora of drunk twenty-somethings on the street that oftentime come in from the likes of....Shakopee and Chaska. Shakopee and Chaska have nobody on the street at that time of night, so I for one would be quite uncomfortable walking there. Since I do not live in a Film Noir, I prefer to not walk down dark, vacant streets alone.

[gatorinmn]

We'll respectfully agree to disagree on this one. I don't remember the last time a Shakopee, Lakeville, Savage, Chaska, etc. police officer had to shoot a suspect caught breaking into cars late at night in the downtowns of those cities:

Suspects in car break-in caught after Minneapolis ramp ruckus

[Slig]

Originally Posted by golfgal

So there is one fight in Chaska and all of the sudden there is a huge gang problem in the suburbs. ok, whatever. As for me touting Rosemount, guess what, it is a great place to live. It is no different then Camden supporting his neighborhood or Slig supporting his neighborhood with the boarded up houses. What ever turns your crank I guess.

Thanks for the cheapshot. Your good pal Robert P Stewart just bought a duplex in my neighborhood so apparently there are others out there who think it has promise.

I understand the whole personal preference of where to live but my main focus on this thread was to point out that gangs exist outside of the city too. Meanwhile, from what I undersand they are virtually non-existant from some of the inner city schools. You aren't going to see much for gangbanging in South and Southwest Highschools or some of the magnet schools either. I just think that saying you won't have gang issues in the suburbs while you have to dodge them every day in the city is a weak argument and this article provides some good evidence of that.

The budget issues that some school districts have that you constantly bring up is another argument I have a major problem with. Honestly the only real concern I have with the inner city schools is the high student turnover rate (since alot of people in the city tend to move around alot more than the suburbs) and the higher rate of students from low-income families. Those are two factors that actually tend to have a negative impact on a school's test scores and graduation rates and creates challenges for the school's staff.

[mnduck]

While it would be disingenuous to claim that Chaska is now 'crime-ridden', what is going on out there is in fact emblematic of what we are seeing across the US. The NYT had an interesting article about similar processes taking place in the suburbs outside of Maryland:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/19/us/19immig.html

As central cities are becoming more 'desirable' for wealthier folks the process of gentrification will continue to push poor people out to the 'burbs, where there is little infrastructure to deal with some of the issues that accompany economic marginality (like crime).

In other parts of the US where such changes are happening this has led to new processes of 'white flight' from suburbs or an anti-immigration backlash. Hopefully our suburbs/exurbs will be able to respond to the new reality that low-income populations are going to be more widely dispersed in the metro area without this happening.

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by Slig

The budget issues that some school districts have that you constantly bring up is another argument I have a major problem with. Honestly the only real concern I have with the inner city schools is the high student turnover rate (since alot of people in the city tend to move around alot more than the suburbs) and the higher rate of students from low-income families. Those are two factors that actually tend to have a negative impact on a school's test scores and graduation rates and creates challenges for the school's staff.

I disagree- I am 99.9% sure that there is no definitive evidence/ research stating that a high percentage of low-income students at a school impacts the school as a whole or brings down all students' test scores. There is evidence stating that when parents do not have much education, students are more likely to not do as well in school; as well as if a student comes from a low-income family, thus lacks many of the resources that more privileged students/ families have at their disposal (for things like tutoring, extracurriculars, etc.), and/or have families struggling with a greater deal of issues at home, there is a stronger likelihood that these students may need additional attention or have a harder time succeeding.

Many non-low-income persons think that if their son/ daughter goes to school with other low-income students, they're education is going to be poor or the "challenging" behaviors of low-income students are going to be so disruptive that little Johnny won't be able to learn a thing. This is, in general, a myth that people accept for a universal truth- yes it does happen in some schools (and especially in schools you see in movies where the white teacher goes in and saves the inner-city schools/ students), but there is usually just as much disruptive/ challenging behaviors in the upper-income schools as well, and to assume that many low-income schools do not have extremely talented/ dedicated/ qualified teachers and administrators that are well able to take care of classroom disruptions is similarly making generalized assumptions. I have a friend whose kids went to a very diverse high school in Brooklyn Park, and recently transferred to Minnetonka due to a move. Her kids come back and tell their mom how "horrible" and misbehaved most of the students in Minnetonka are compared to B.P., and an additional concern for the family is a big lack of diversity there.

My parents taught in low-income schools, and my siblings and I attended those very same low-income schools. We all had strong grades/ test scores, did well in our colleges of choice, my siblings both have graduate degrees (one's a PhD), and we are all working in great professional positions. Of the classmates I graduated high school with, many did very well on ACT/ SAT, many took rigorous AP coursework, and most got in to their first-pick college (which included a lot of Ivy's).

There are two schools in my neighborhood that are defying the myth that schools with a significant percentage of low-income students can't perform highly: Loring Community School and Patrick Henry High. Both have had several write-ups in the Star Tribune in the past year, both have won statewide awards, and Patrick seems to get statewide and national awards every other day (includes both the high school and IB program)- I just read today that Patrick led the state with students receiving Gates Millenium scholarships last year (4 or 5) and 2 more students received this extremely high honor again this year, not to mention the dozens of other Henry students receiving numerous other prestigious scholarships every year.

[Slig]

I didn't word that part of the reply how I wanted to. I was referring more to the test score numbers which in the past have been a large point of criticism for the quality of the inner city schools. I do still believe that from a macro perspective there is a higher likelihood that a student will achieve if he/she is not living in poverty, although that isn't to say that there aren't numerous exceptions. I do know from friends who work in the district that students without resources are challenged in many ways on a daily basis and alot of times it creates more challenges for the school. One example of this is a student at a Minneapolis high school stopped showing up to school when the temperature went below zero last winter because she was just outside of the range to receive free bussing (I believe it is 1.5 or 2 miles) and her family couldn't afford to give her $4.50 a day to take the city bus to and from school. This is a bit of an extreme case but these are the kinds of issues that take place in schools in the city that realistically probably occur far less often in a wealthier suburban school district.

Will those types of things affect the performance of my kids? Doubtful. Will it affect the district's test scores though? Probably.

[Clifford63]

Originally Posted by golfgal

So there is one fight in Chaska and all of the sudden there is a huge gang problem in the suburbs. ok, whatever. As for me touting Rosemount, guess what, it is a great place to live. It is no different then Camden supporting his neighborhood or Slig supporting his neighborhood with the boarded up houses. What ever turns your crank I guess.

No problems with promoting Rosemount. Obviouisly you like it there, and that is great. I know several people there and they all have good things to say too. What I don't get is why you have to knock other places. You don't like Woodbury for some reason you fail to articulate, you bash South Washington County Schools for reasons that seem trivial, and you make statements about Minneapolis that are completely false on a regular basis.

I agree that one article in a newspaper is not some defacto indication that the burbs are in great danger, but don't expect people to ignore your jabs or drink your koolaid.